The Conservative Case for Cornel West | Opinion

"The political triumph of Donald Trump shattered the establishments in the Democratic and Republican parties," claimed Dr. Cornel West in 2016. That year heralded the end of "American neoliberalism" and the arrival of a "new era." The old establishment of both the Left and Right, "wedded to the rule of Big Money and to the reign of meretricious politicians," was demolished by Trump's election to the presidency.

Since then, a new political discourse has cracked through the crumbling remains of the establishment parties, calling for a departure from neoliberal policies, rampant globalization, and the empty brand of "respectability" touted by elitists who are out of touch with the needs and cultural sensibilities of everyday working-class people.

Especially among its younger proponents, this new conversation has taken on a populist, proletarian, and frank—at times irreverent—tone. As much as ours is a deeply polarized age, the impulse to flock to the fringes of conventionality has led to a convergence between "postliberals" of the Left and Right, making for what some call a "horseshoe" effect.

Thus while some conservatives may find West's left-leaning platform repellent, I'd argue that—in light of the times—they should consider his candidacy. His form of leftism is far from conventional, to say the least. West, a prime horseshoe candidate, shows a willingness to go to the fringes of standard political discourse that may be enough to win over conservative votes.

First declaring his candidacy for the 2024 presidency with the People's Party, then with the Green Party, and as of October as an independent, Dr. West has been variously accused of being an idealist and risking to split the left-of-center vote. He proclaims himself a "libertarian socialist," and a "prophetic," "Chekhovian" Christian with "gangster proclivities." Yet he is no stranger to those who lean Right nor to those without religious beliefs. West has built a reputation for conversing and even collaborating with a broad range of political views and figures, never refusing an invitation to engage in open dialogue and friendly debate—deeming people of all ideological convictions worthy of the title "brother" and "sister."

West concedes that Trump's brand of populism rightly "rejected the economic neglect of neoliberal policies and the self-righteous arrogance of elites," and thus attracted the "white working- and middle-class." Yet support for Trump was fueled by "anger and anguish," as the former president sold them a narrative that blamed "their social misery on minorities, and...alienated Mexican immigrants, Muslims, black people, Jews, gay people, women and China." But West did not reserve his criticism for Trump alone. "The abysmal failure of the Democratic party," he continued, "to speak to the arrested mobility and escalating poverty of working people unleashed a hate-filled populism and protectionism."

Inflammatory rhetoric aside, Trump successfully enacted policies that bolstered American industries which indeed contributed to economic growth among lower-income populations. Yet that success was limited, largely due to Trump's lack of an overarching vision for the nation. In the end, Trump proved both politically short-sighted (his decade of political involvement doesn't exactly measure up to West's four-plus decades) and morally compromised.

West's populism makes up for both Trump and the Democratic establishment's pitfalls. His comprehensive social vision accounts for working-class racial and ethnic minorities as well as whites.

Beyond his economic platform, West can win over conservatives with his ardent defense of free speech and advocacy against cancel culture. His dedication to preserving the "right to be wrong" is rooted in something much stronger than conventional "anti-woke," reactionary rhetoric: a fervent belief in democratic virtue and above all, the Christian virtue of love of neighbor—including one's enemies. His commitment to those traditions, without making him a backward-looking traditionalist, is a breath of fresh air for those committed to the religious and moral roots of the American project.

West's criticism of authoritarianism, technocracy, and globalization may also appeal to conservatives concerned about the principle of subsidiarity and the preservation of individual liberties from being subsumed by corporations and the state. These commitments will at times bring him to support policies that turn off conservatives—namely in his position on abortion rights. However, West's pro-choice sympathies appear to be more the product of cognitive dissonance (considering his frequent reference to the dignity of human beings "from womb to tomb") than deep-seated pro-abortion sentiment. Furthermore, his economic policies may prove to decrease the demand for abortion—thereby fulfilling the call from progressive pro-lifers to "make abortion unthinkable," rather than just illegal.

These drawbacks granted, West's openness to dialogue and collaboration with his ideological opponents (he's held events with Patrick Deneen, Robert P. George, and Tucker Carlson, just to name a few) is worth serious consideration—for reasons both practical and moral. Though never hiding his disagreement with those who lean Right, his willingness to seek points of convergence, and to presume their good intentions rather than villainizing them, make West a leftist that conservatives can't afford to write off.

Never one to mince words, West always finds a way to express his strongly held disagreements with opponents with the utmost charity and respect. And he does so with his unique brand of performative flair––second perhaps only to Trump's. West is a self-proclaimed "jazz man"; his aesthetic and public persona—from his dress to his spoken-style—take cues from America's musical legends. The comprehensiveness and authenticity of his morally and spiritually rich vision is desperately needed in a nihilistic and polarized historical moment such as this one.

Of course, a third party vote is good for next to nothing under the reign of the current duopoly. But regardless of how one votes, West's platform should be afforded visibility in the mainstream. Though third party candidates have rarely found success in the polls, their capacity to influence the discourse is far from negligible. Brother West's influence ought to be welcomed by all Americans who have yet to give up on the "tragic, comic hope" that is this nation.

Stephen G. Adubato is a journalism fellow at COMPACT Magazine and a professor of philosophy in NYC. He is also the curator of the Cracks in Postmodernity blog, podcast, and magazine. Follow him on Twitter @stephengadubato

The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.